Cross-cultural dining · Bill review · Service concept↓2026 / Portfolio revisit
THE CASE, AT A GLANCE
Separate the bill, the tip and the final decision.
How can a diner understand existing charges and make an explicit tip choice before a terminal handoff?
My contribution
Independent · Research, UX/UI & service concept
What you can explore
Bill-to-terminal journey · Interactive concept
Evidence & next validation +
What this builds onThe archive includes research and hardware exploration. The new flow is a design proposal; no completed payment integration or new test result is claimed.
The next question to testCan diners identify an included service charge, choose zero or a custom tip, and recover the same amount after a connection error? The V3 tasks are prepared, not yet run.
A person may overlook a service charge and add a tip unintentionally.
Design response
Show subtotal, tax and service charge before asking for a tip. Explain the charge without assuming how the restaurant distributes it.
A service charge is included.
An additional tip is your choice.
Validation question
Can someone identify what is already billed and explain that an additional tip is optional?
02 / CHOOSE
Start with no selection.
Risk to test
A preselected percentage may be mistaken for a required amount.
Design response
Give percentage, no-tip and custom choices equal access. Show the total only after an active selection.
18%$8.64
20%$9.60
No tip$0.00
Validation question
Can someone continue with $0 additional tip without searching for a hidden option?
03 / CONFIRM
Check the amount before sending.
Risk to test
A person may confuse reviewing, sending and actually paying.
Design response
Keep an editable review, then match the bill ID and total on the terminal. Connection failure must never imply payment success.
REVIEW YOUR AMOUNT
Subtotal
$48.00
Tax
$3.84
Service charge
$0.00
Your tip · 20%
$9.60
Total
$61.44
Validation question
Can someone tell what was sent, what was confirmed and whether any payment occurred?
Evidence boundary
Confirmed: this is an independent project. Visible artifact: the editable V2 interface and concept prototype. The risks above are design hypotheses, not observed findings. Interviews, hardware results and usability outcomes need source evidence before publication.
Prototype map: bill → choice → review → terminal, with service-charge, custom-input and connection-recovery branches.
A table number gives the bill a place. The torn edge makes the paper recognisable. A handwritten thank-you adds warmth after the decision.
The texture belongs to the setting. The numbers get a clean, white surface.
Material exploration / AI-generated concept image
03 / Try the experienceAn interactive concept
The bill. The choice. The handoff.
Follow one amount from start to finish.
Choose a tip, enter your own amount or choose zero. Review the calculation, open the terminal and confirm. Try a connection issue along the way, then find the same amount in Saved.
Choose an example bill
Amounts shown before an optional tip. Switching examples starts a new choice and keeps the latest confirmed summary.
A simplified, local demonstration. No account, payment or external service is connected. Changes reset when the page reloads.
9:41••• ▰
INTERFACE COLLECTIONBrowse the TipEasy interfaces+
04 / The interfacesA connected family of states
Every line has a reason.
The peach table ticket anchors the bill. White receipts hold the figures. Lilac brings attention to an included charge; sage marks an amount that has been confirmed.
Interface collection / tap to enlarge
01Check what is on the bill02Make an explicit tip choice03Choose no additional tip04Review every amount05Keep the confirmed summary
One connected decision / 02 surfaces
Your choice. Still your choice.
The terminal carries the same bill forward. A large total makes the handoff easy to check, with a clear return to the phone if anything needs changing.
The archived project explored RFID, Arduino, an OLED display and thermal printing. Those materials informed the idea of a handoff at the table.
The new terminal interface demonstrates that interaction. It does not establish a completed payment integration.
Original portfolio / physical prototype material
TIPEASY / FORMATIVE USABILITY STUDY / NOT YET RUN
Test understanding, not just taps.
Planned study · 5 participants · 20–25 minutes each Recruit people with varying familiarity with US tipping. This is a proposed plan, not a completed study.
Moderator opening
“We are testing the design, not you. Think aloud as you go. This is a concept prototype; no money will move. You can stop at any point.” Ask permission before recording. Use participant codes and avoid storing payment details.
The task buttons open prepared example states. They do not record a participant, collect results or mark a study complete. Starting a task replaces the current draft; the latest confirmed demo summary is kept.
01 / Read the bill
Read to participant
Your restaurant bill is open. Explain what you would be charged before any tip.
Moderator notes
Start: Service charge included.
Expected: $48.00 + $3.84 + $8.64 = $60.48. Participant identifies the service charge.
02 / Make your own choice
Read to participant
You do not want to add anything beyond the charges already on the bill. Prepare the amount for review.
Moderator notes
Start: Service charge included.
Expected: $0 additional tip; total $60.48. Observe whether the option is found without a hint.
03 / Correct an amount
Read to participant
You want to leave a $10 tip. The custom amount currently shows an invalid negative value. Explain what is wrong, then use the available correction and check the total.
Moderator notes
Start: Custom input validation, without a service charge.
Expected: recognize −5 as invalid and review $61.84 after correction. The Figma prototype uses a preset $10 correction; this browser version also accepts typed amounts. Treat keyboard testing as a separate browser check.
04 / Recover safely
Read to participant
The terminal is disconnected. Decide what to do next and explain whether the amount has been sent or paid.
Moderator notes
Start: Connection recovery.
Expected: distinguish unsent amount from payment; retry or return to review without assuming success.
Record the evidence
For each task record: participant code · outcome (independent / assisted / incomplete) · time · wrong turns · amount understood · exact quote · confidence (1–5) · issue severity. Keep observed behavior separate from your interpretation.
Blank results template · Not completed
Participant ___ Task ___ Outcome ___ Time ___
Observed behavior / exact quote:
Interpretation / possible cause:
Design change to try:
Retest observation:
Decision rule
Prioritize any mistaken payment status or unintended amount. Revise repeated comprehension problems, then retest. With five participants, report counts and examples; do not present them as population-wide success rates.
Portfolio results — leave blank until the study happens.
No success rate, interview quote or improvement metric has been inserted. Add dated observations and before/after examples only after testing.
I kept the receipt metaphor, but reduced its visual noise. Table tickets, clear totals and a handwritten closing each have a place in the sequence. The amounts remain easy to inspect.
Next validation
Test the moments that could be misunderstood.
Next, I would ask a diner to identify the service charge, choose no additional tip, explain the total and recover from a connection problem. I would also check whether the terminal confirmation is understood as an amount confirmation, not a completed payment. These are proposed tasks, not completed findings.
TipEasy is an independent project. The V3 decision story and proposed validation plan build on the V2 interface and component system. The browser prototype supports real numeric entry; the Figma correction uses a preset amount. Bill amounts are illustrative. The bill-presenter scene is AI-generated; the hardware board is original portfolio material. Texture stays outside monetary reading areas. The 2026 portfolio revisit uses AI-assisted interface refinement and presentation production under my direction. No launch or measured usability improvement is claimed.